Swanage Railway General Discussion

Just swap the boiler and have a regulator that opens the other way...what could possibly go wrong ?

And whilst this is clearly a joke, Birch Grove does open 'the wrong way'

 

Because I'm really boring I been amusing myself with trying work out the fate of the tenders that entered the yard: The Q gained it's tender from 31625. Which is ironic as the Qs when built in 1938/39 were given second hand tenders from Us in the first place.

 

It depends on the details of the design.
I have machined both regulators on the Q and U. The heads, the part that's attached to main steam pipe are mirror images of each other. It leans over to line up with the pin on the end of the regulator rod.
Oddly the Q has a monel main valve. It was a bore to scrape in.
The regulator operation on Birch Grove is consistent with Terriers and strangely 847 in that it opens anti clockwise. I wonder if there was a bit of Stroudley influence on Eastliegh via Drummond?

 

Admittedly my post was a bit simplistic and assumed a vertical regulator. I know from experience that it is possible to achieve in this case. In other words, if you couple it up the wrong way round it will be open when shut and vice versa.

 

Birch Grove, 847, most Drummond LSWR locos and Caledonian locos (e.g. 828) have a regulator that opens anticlockwise, and where the regulator handle extends down below the pivot point, so one can push it away from oneself. On Birchgrove and (I think) on 828, the regulator handle also extends above the pivot point, so one can still push it away, or one can pull it towards oneself, depending on what takes your fancy/is easier. The Terriers (and I believe the E1) are a bit interesting in this regard because they were designed with the anticlockwise opening, but (I guess because of the height of the boiler within the cab), only have the regulator handle extending above the pivot point, so the driver always has to pull it towards themselves. As a result if you compare the appearance of the regulator relative to the reverser in a Terrier cab to that of something like an Austerity (allowing for the fact that one is RHD and the other LHD), the position the regulator is in on the Austerity when fully open is where it is shut on the Terrier, and vice versa.
My interpretation of why previously mentioned locos have regulators like this is that Birch Grove inherited this way of positioning the regulator from the Terriers, but the height of the pivot point within the cab allowed the handle to extend below the pivot point as well as above. In the same way Drummond had his locos like that when both at the Caledonian and then the LSWR, and subsequent engineers on both railways saw no reason to change the direction of travel of the regulator when opening it.

 

It’s only 1440 now

 

A little more visually complete than earlier in the week.

 

If I were a trainspotter, I'd be totally confused, now.

 

Perhaps it is a Purbeck thing that we like to keep those trainspotters guessing!

 

Just like this one here - the cabside number belongs to the loco and the smokebox number to the boiler. Seen at Whitby in 2003

In this instance it reflects the fact that 80135 now carries the boiler originally used on 80116 when new - and 80116's first shed was Whitby.

Peter

 

Spotters would have had a choice to make in the 1920's on the LMS when the Midland practice of putting numbers on the tenders was adopted across the company. The LNWR being far more practical had realised that tenders didn't spend as long in works as the engine and therefore had less tenders than engines. There are photographs showing a different number on the front smokebox plate as opposed to that on the tender itself.

 

Being in South Western territory, I'm surprised the Swanage is using numbers at all - they didn't need them in Mr Beattie's day, and he had far more locomotives to worry about than they do now! Just get some plates cast with such stirring and fire-breathing names as Stromboli, Vesuvius and Wildfire; Canute if sea level continues to rise (and Sultana to play to the foodie crowd on the Wessex Belle ... )

Tom

 

Well. Tom, since you are something of a Chatham fan and no Martley engines survive, as he was also keener on names than numbers, how about resurrecting the names Flirt and Frolic on two of the Bluebell's SE&CR engines in his honour?

 

Well, we do - as did Mr Martley - have a loco called Bluebell!

Tom

 

The IWSR have mostly named locomotives too - perhaps we should risk invoking the wrath of certain correspondents here by suggesting suitable names for the Ivatts... (neither 'Havenstreet' nor 'Wootton' were used in the original naming series, IIRC...)

 

"Leviathan" and "Titan" have good antecedents and would be in keeping with their size ...

Tom

 

I believe 41298 and 41313 are unofficially named after the founding members of the Ivatt Trust who donated them to the IOWSR. Their names escape me at the moment though.

 

The donors did not wish them to be named.

 

Peter and Roy are their unofficial names.